The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-04-02
THE RECORD OF THE COURTS.
Supreme Court
Hon. Byron <. Elliott, Chief Justice.
The decisions rendered April were:

Hon. Byron & Elliott, Chief justice
The decisions rendered April were:
STANDARDIZATION
1883. Weir Plow Company vs. VIM. F.
Walmsley ct al. Vigo S. c. Affirmed. Zol-
lars. J.-Suit to recover judgment against ap-
pellees for amount of money which. it is
alleged, Walmsley collected upon cash sales of
implements and failed to remit, and for the
amount OF notes which he had taken upon sales
and turned over. but which we're not paid by
the makers and which appelees agree to iu-
dorse. Appellee Carithers answered that at the
time he executed the contracts as surety for
Walmaley the latter had hand 81. 900 worth
OF implements which ne had prior to this time
purchased of appellant; that defendant was not
aware of that fact at the time of executing the
contract, and that subsequent to executing the
contract. and without his consent or knowledge,
the said implements were sold by Wamsley as
implements furnished under the contract.
Held that the answer was sufficient as showing
facts to release the surety. e. cross COM
plant in such by the surety that the orig
inal contract, which was one for the furnishing
of farming implements as they might be ordered
ny the principal, had been changed to read that
all goods specified in the contract had been de-
livered, is sufficient.
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS..
1892. Charles Heick ct AL VS.. Augustus C.
Voight Porter G. c. Affirmed. Mitchell, J.
I'm a proceeding for the establishment of
ditch answers of former adjudication that the
work was impracticahle. and that its cost would
exceed the benefits. not proper until the
report of the comm ssioner of drainage has been
received. u The drainage act is constitution
al in the respect that the construction of DRAIN
under the statute. is not the taking Of the prop
erty of individual for private purpose,
without just compensation. q The assess
ment of benefits upon the lands which found
to be benefited by the construction of the drain
are not paid for the purpose of improving the
highway The assessment is made upon the
theory that each tract of land assessed receives
u - =:
value by the improvement equal to the assess
ment. land owner is not subjected to double
taxation for the improvement of highways BEN
Gifted by such drain.
STREET AssEssMENT-sTATUrE OF LIMITATIONS
1897 Francis NJ. Churchman ct al VS.. City
of Indianapolis Marion S c. Affirmed. Niblack
J.-Money voluntarily paid on demand in the
nature of tax assessment to promote q
street improvement cannot be recovered back
except in pursuance of some express statu-
tory provision authorizing such recovery
There is no statute permitting. much less re-
quring, it to be repaid. e. The concealment
of cause of action to take 1t out of the statute
OF limitations must consist OF some affirmative
act or line of conduct. The failure of a city
treasurer to voluntarily communicate what tho
record of the Common Council proceedings dis
closed as affecting an assessment was not an
affirmative act. The statement of the treasurer
that he had warrant for the collection of the
assessment. and was about to sell the property,
was not concealment.
OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES.
1880. Henry d. Vancleave vs. Samuel ].
Beach. Fountain c. c. Affirmed Elliott, c..
1.-The facts were that appellee was indebted to
Shankiin & Co., in the sum of $48S, for which he
gave his note: he owned note executed BY one
Reuter- for $547 which he offered to sell for $500
Appellant asked to see the note. agreeing to buy
1t and pay that amount Appellee exhibited the
note Appellant took it away from him and laid
on the table tine 1888 note and the difference IN
money. Appellee objected to appellants pro-
ceediugs, but after some delay TODD the note and
money to prevent them from being lost Snbse-
ouently, he rendered the money and note to sp
pelant, but no tender made in court. APP.
pellee did not take the note as payment. There
sale. The acron is in tort and q tender
| in court was not Necessary
| 1854 Washington Rice vs. Georre H. Man
! ford Jefferson c. c. Affirmed. Howk, j.
| The general verdict was found upon conflicting
evidence and the evidence in the record tends &c
| sustain it on every material point It will no,
be disturbed.